‘Last month I discussed the Court of Appeal decision in Ashfaq v International Insurance Company of Hannover PLC [2017] EWCA Civ 357 in which the insurers were held to be entitled to avoid a commercial landlord policy on grounds of non-disclosure of pending criminal proceedings. The Courts again considered avoidance for misrepresentation and non-disclosure in this latest case heard by Judge Slater in the Queens Bench Division.’

‘In EXP v Barker, the trial judge and Court of Appeal were faced with an unusual situation. An expert witness – although undoubtedly skilled and experienced in his field – had omitted to mention a close personal connection to the party instructing him.’

“The provisions in Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 conferring powers to stop, question, and detain a person at a port or border for up to nine hours for the purpose of determining whether he appeared to be a person concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism were not incompatible with article 5, 6 or 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; or with the right to freedom of movement under articles 20 and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.”

“The seriousness of terrorist activity about which a defendant failed to give information, rather than the extent of the information that could have been provided, was what determined the level of criminality which had to be reflected in the sentence.”